Utah: Call and Conversation Recording Consent Requirements
The short answer
Utah generally permits a private person to record a wire, electronic, or protected oral communication when the recorder is a party or one party gave prior consent, unless the purpose is to commit a criminal or tortious act (Utah Code § 77-23a-4(7)(b)). An ordinary violation is a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years and a $5,000 fine. Civil relief can include actual-or-statutory damages, punitive damages, fees, and costs, and unlawfully intercepted contents and derivative evidence are excluded.
Ask Ezel about your situation
This is the general rule in Utah. Ezel applies current Utah law to your specific facts and answers with citations to the statutes.
| Governing law and covered recording | Utah's Interception of Communications Act prohibits intentional or knowing interception and knowing use or disclosure of unlawfully intercepted wire, electronic, or protected oral communications; interception requires acquisition through a device (§§ 77-23a-3(10), 77-23a-4(1)) |
|---|---|
| Whose consent a participant needs | One-party rule. A private person may intercept when the recorder is a party or one party gave prior consent, unless the purpose is committing a criminal or tortious act (§ 77-23a-4(7)(b)) |
| Privacy, confidentiality, or secrecy trigger | An oral communication is protected only when the speaker exhibits an expectation against interception under circumstances justifying it (§ 77-23a-3(13)); wire and electronic definitions have no comparable expectation element |
| Telephone, in-person, and electronic coverage | Wire covers aural transfers carried partly through wire/cable facilities and electronic storage; electronic broadly covers transmitted sounds and data. The radio portion of a cordless handset-to-base call is expressly excluded from both definitions (§ 77-23a-3(5), (19)) |
| How consent or notice is given | Being a party is independently sufficient; otherwise one party must give prior consent. The statute prescribes no writing, spoken script, warning tone, or fixed duration (§ 77-23a-4(7)(b)) |
| Major participant-facing exceptions | The private one-party exception fails for a criminal or tortious purpose. Other express exceptions include electronic communications configured for general-public access and specified readily accessible public radio communications (§ 77-23a-4(7)–(8)) |
| Criminal classification and penalty | Ordinary violation: third-degree felony (§ 77-23a-4(10)(a)), punishable by up to 5 years and a fine up to $5,000 (§§ 76-3-203(3), 76-3-301(1)(b)); narrower first-offense reductions apply to specified unscrambled radio interceptions |
| Civil remedy and evidence effect | Civil relief may include equitable relief, punitive damages, fees/costs, and the greater of actual damages plus profits or $100/day or $10,000; 2-year discovery period and good-faith defense (§ 77-23a-11). Section 77-23a-7 excludes unlawfully intercepted contents and derivatives |
| Interstate and federal boundary | Utah and federal law both permit participant or one-party-consented interception unless its purpose is criminal or tortious (Utah Code § 77-23a-4(7)(b); 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d)). Utah adds its own felony, damages, and evidence rules; all-party consent is the prudent interstate baseline |
Compare this rule across all 50 states + DC →
Requirements one by one
Governing law and covered recording
Utah Code § 77-23a-4(1) prohibits intentional or knowing interception and the knowing use or disclosure of contents obtained through an interception violating that section. Section 77-23a-3(10) defines interception as acquiring contents through an electronic, mechanical, or other device.
Whose consent a participant needs
Utah uses an express one-party exception. A private person may intercept when that person “is a party to the communication” or one party gave prior consent, unless the interception is for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act (§ 77-23a-4(7)(b)).
Privacy, confidentiality, or secrecy trigger
For face-to-face speech, § 77-23a-3(13) protects an oral communication only when the speaker exhibits an expectation against interception under circumstances justifying it. The wire and electronic definitions do not repeat that expectation requirement.
Telephone, in-person, and electronic coverage
Wire communication includes an aural transfer carried at least partly by wire, cable, or a similar connection and includes electronic storage. Electronic communication broadly includes transmitted sounds and data. Both definitions expressly exclude the radio portion transmitted between a cordless handset and its base (§ 77-23a-3(5)(a), (19)(b)), so that segment does not fit either named category by those definitions alone.
How consent or notice is given
Being a party is independently sufficient. Otherwise one party must give prior consent. Section 77-23a-4(7)(b) prescribes no writing, spoken formula, warning tone, or fixed duration.
Major participant-facing exceptions
The private one-party permission is unavailable when the interception is for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortious act. Section 77-23a-4(8) separately permits interception of electronic communications configured for ready public access and specified public or readily accessible radio communications.
Criminal classification and penalty
Section 77-23a-4(10)(a) makes an ordinary violation a third-degree felony. Utah Code § 76-3-203(3) authorizes imprisonment up to five years, and § 76-3-301(1)(b) authorizes a fine up to $5,000.
The offense section has narrower first-offense misdemeanor classifications for specified unscrambled radio interceptions not undertaken for a tortious, illegal, commercial-advantage, or private-gain purpose. Those special radio provisions do not replace the ordinary third-degree-felony rule.
Civil remedy and evidence effect
Section 77-23a-11 permits equitable or declaratory relief, punitive damages in appropriate cases, and reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs. For an ordinary action, the court may assess the greater of actual damages plus the violator's profits or statutory damages of $100 per violation day or $10,000, whichever is greater. The section also supplies a good-faith defense and a two-year period measured from the claimant's first reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.
Section 77-23a-7 excludes unlawfully intercepted contents and derivative evidence from Utah proceedings when disclosure would violate the chapter.
Interstate and federal boundary
Federal § 2511(2)(d) and Utah § 77-23a-4(7)(b) use the same participant-or-one-party-consent baseline and criminal-or-tortious-purpose limit. Utah separately supplies its own felony classification, civil damages, and exclusion rule. Neither text resolves which state's law governs a multistate call; obtain every participant's consent when potentially applicable rules differ.
What trips people up
The purpose exception matters even when you are a participant. Party status ordinarily suffices, but § 77-23a-4(7)(b) withdraws the permission for an interception aimed at committing a criminal or tortious act.
The cordless handset-to-base segment is expressly excluded twice. Utah excludes that radio portion from both electronic and wire communication. Do not assume the broad electronic definition silently includes it.
The statutory damages figure is a floor alternative, not a flat award. For ordinary violations, § 77-23a-11(3)(b) lets the court choose the greater of actual damages plus profits or $100 per day or $10,000, whichever is greater.
Common questions
May I record my own private conversation without announcing it? Generally yes under § 77-23a-4(7)(b), because being a party is independently sufficient, unless the interception is for a criminal or tortious purpose or another specialized law applies.
Can an outsider record if one participant agrees? Yes under the same subsection when one party gave prior consent and the purpose is not criminal or tortious.
How long does a person have to sue under the interception chapter? Section 77-23a-11(5) bars an action filed later than two years after the claimant first had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.
Statutes and sources
- Utah Code § 77-23a-3 — definitions of intercept and wire, oral, and electronic communication. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23A/C77-23a_1800010118000101.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Utah Code § 77-23a-4 — offense, one-party exception, purpose limit, and classifications. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23A/C77-23a_1800010118000101.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Utah Code § 77-23a-7 — exclusionary rule. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23A/C77-23a_1800010118000101.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Utah Code § 77-23a-11 — civil relief, damages, defenses, and limitations period. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title77/Chapter23A/C77-23a_1800010118000101.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Utah Code § 76-3-203(3) — third-degree felony imprisonment maximum. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter3/C76-3_1800010118000101.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- Utah Code § 76-3-301(1)(b) — third-degree felony fine maximum. https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title76/Chapter3/C76-3_1800010118000101.pdf (accessed 2026-07-20)
- 18 U.S.C. § 2511(2)(d) — federal private-participant rule. https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section2511&num=0&edition=prelim (accessed 2026-07-20)
Source links
Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.
Get the answer for your situation
You just read how Utah handles this in general. Ezel applies current Utah law to your facts and answers your specific question, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.